Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Sep 13th, 2000 @ 7:35pm

   
   

   Benefit??? One less competitor.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: No Subject Given

   

   Mike (profile), Sep 14th, 2000 @ 3:08am

   
   

   One less very small competitor. I'm not sure that $60 million, or whatever they paid for it, is worth it to get rid of one clearly non-threatening competitor.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   110% stupid move!

   

   Ryan, Sep 14th, 2000 @ 7:29am

   
   

   I guess it's just another sign of how barnes and noble still doesn't get the net. It's annoying how stupid some companies can be, if they had waited long enough I'm sure fatbrain would have headed down the toilet within a few short months anyway and they'd have saved a nice little packet but that's the price you pay for not knowing your market.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Re: 110% stupid move!

   

   mhh5, Sep 15th, 2000 @ 1:29am

   
   

   How much are customers worth? Maybe B&N thought that if they spent $60M now, that would save them advertizing and soliciting costs later? Why start from scratch? I'm not sure how much customers are worth or what it means to say your company has X million register users... (Stats like that are always fishy. I think I saw a stat that said the number of registered users of AOL IM was about half the population of the US or something stupidly high.) But how many customers do you think are worth $60M?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment